netdev - Re: [PATCH v9 net-next 4/7] openvswitch: add layer 3 flow/port support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 20 May 2016 19:14:20 +0900
From:	Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
To:	Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org,
	Lorand Jakab <lojakab@...co.com>,
	Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@...nge.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 net-next 4/7] openvswitch: add layer 3 flow/port
 support

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:20:04AM +0200, Jiri Benc wrote:
> On Fri, 20 May 2016 18:12:05 +0900, Simon Horman wrote:

[...]

> > 3. With regards to the mirroring part of your question, I need to check
> >    on that and possibly its broken. But my thinking is that a mirroring
> >    vport would regarded in the same way as any other vport in this respect
> >    and the presence of the "layer3" flag would control whether an Ethernet
> >    header is present or not.
> > 
> >    It may be the case that its not possible to use a tunnel vport as a
> >    mirroring vport. And as all other vports currently do not support
> >    "layer3" then currently an Ethernet header would always be present
> >    on output to a mirror.
> 
> We can just require a mirror port to be always L2 and output the L3
> packets with zero Ethernet addresses. For mirroring, this should be
> okay(?)

Yes, I expect that is a good approach.

I'll look over the code to see about making that so if its not already the
case.